Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Tell A Friend Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites
OpEdNews Op Eds

FOREIGN POLICY QUESTIONS FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT ANSWERED BY A COGNITIVIST-NOT A NEO-CON, A NEO-LIBERAL, NOR EXTREME RIGH

By       Message Kevin Anthony Stoda       (Page 1 of 7 pages)     Permalink    (# of views)   No comments

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...)
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Author 5798
Become a Fan
  (9 fans)
- Advertisement -
FOREIGN POLICY QUESTIONS FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT ANSWERED BY A COGNITIVIST—NOT A NEO-CON, A NEO-LIBERAL, NOR EXTREME RIGHT/LEFT WINGER

By Kevin Stoda, on-line (and tongue & cheek) candidate for Democratic and Republican parties for President of the United States   

Last week, 18th of February 2008, I picked up the International Herald Tribune and noticed that the main IHT editorial was entitled:  “Foreign Policy Questions for the Next President”.   The editorialists wrote:

 

“President George W. Bush's mismanagement reaches far beyond Iraq. He has torn up international treaties, bullied and alienated old friends, and enabled old and new enemies. Before Americans choose a president they will need to know how he or she plans to rebuild America's military strength and its moral standing and address a host of difficult challenges around the world.” (p.8)

 

In all, the editorialists posed an in-exhaustive list of 11 questions for the USA presidential candidates.

- Advertisement -
 

The major question was obviously how the incoming president plans to handle the disastrous” ongoing war in Iraq. 

 

The other foreign policy questions concern (1) America’s international leadership, (2) China, (3) Russia, (4) Iran, (4) North Korea, (5) the Middle East, (6)  defense spending, (7) non-proliferation, (8) terrorism, and (9)American policy on use-of-force in the near future.

 

Since my campaign is a campaign of ideas and substance, I will try to answer these poignant foreign policy questions from the dining room table of my apartment in Kuwait, which overlooks the Persian (or Arabian) Gulf, i.e. where muh of the world’s oil passes through on any one day.

- Advertisement -
 

First of all, besides being a progressive evangelical candidate, I need to note that as far as political science and research goes, I am a cognitivist—i.e. not a neo-con, conservative, neo-liberal, liberal, nor extreme left- nor right-winger.

 

Cognitivists don’t simply define global relations in terms of who has might as realists, neo-cons, conservatives and right wing hawks do.

 

Nor do cognivists assume the existence of potential creation of a global new order in terms of liberal political-economic theory.

 

Cognitivists come from both camps as well as the dated camps of dependency and interdependency theory.  As well, they look much more at how the rules of the game or perceived rules of the game effect how international affairs are conducted.

 

In a nutshell, Cognitivists are holistic in how they deal with international affairs and approach domestic politics.

  COGNITIVISTS AND REGIME THEORY 

Cognitivists define regimes—whether these regimes are a single government, such as the USA or Russia, or an international regime, such as the European Union, NAFTA or the United Nations— not as simply state actors but as regimes consisting of how the rules of the international affairs are played in and cross societies where the regime is present.  They also look at the social-civil, economic, developmental, and political forces under lying the actual behaviors of political actors and forces.

- Advertisement -
 

This means that regulations and acceptable behavior as defined (and carried out) by participants in a regime have just as much importance as  who has the most money, weapons or propaganda instruments on hand.

 

This means that in terms of leadership on the world stage, any country, such as the United States must recognize what the acceptable rules of the game of international relations are somewhat stable and can usually only be changed or evolved over time.

 

Second, if change is needed in the regime and how the regime participants function, change is navigated and negotiated—but never demanded in the manner that a 3-year old demands his favorite toy or “desire of the day”.  It is this form of U.S. foreign policy of the last decade that America must rid itself permanently.  It is simply inappropriate and unhelpful for a superpower to be wandering about like a bull-dozer in a china warehouse.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7

 

- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

KEVIN STODA-has been blessed to have either traveled in or worked in nearly 100 countries on five continents over the past two and a half decades.--He sees himself as a peace educator and have been-- a promoter of good economic and social development--making-him an enemy of my homelands humongous DEFENSE SPENDING and its focus on using weapons to try and solve global (more...)
 

Kevin Anthony Stoda Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

BED-INs and Other Protests Needed Now

GULF CIVIL SOCIETY FORUM calls for Gulf Monarchies to abandon absolutism and to adopt European-style Parliaments

TRIBE, TRIBALISM AND CULTURAL CHANGE-KUWAIT 2008

A WORLD OF PRETENDERS: Partial Review of the Filipino Novel, THE PRETENDERS by F. Sionil Jose

PHILIPP ROESLER, of Vietnamese Descent. to Head the Health Ministry in Germany, as his own Party Plans to Push for more

Mitigation of Tsunami's and Earthquakes--Has JAPAN DONE ENOUGH?